Casino Royale - New Bond, New Girl, New Villain
 

What do you all think about the casting for the Bond film so far? How do you feel about the franchise 'reboot'?

Frankly, I thought Daniel Craig was an interesting choice for the role, and I definitely wanted to see what someone so far away from the established Bond archetype could do with it.

Eva Green for Vesper, this film's Bond girl, was another way out choice too. Never seen her in anything so I can't really make a judgment.

Mads Mikkelsen for Le Chiffre I definitely couldn't have imagined. I'd heard of him from the Pusher series, but I never paid much attention. Thinking back to the production photos for that, he really looks diabolical enough.

Oh yeah, and script by Paul Haggis. After watching Crash, that sounds promising.

I thought there was already a thread for Casino Royale so there's no need for a new one about this - Teaser Trailer:
Link

You'll have to deal with it being in French for now though but it still looks promising.

"J'ai entendu dire que les Double Zéros ont une espérance de vie très limités." Nice.

I think it might be quite good. Daniel Craig was excellent in Layer Cake, and I haven't seen Munich yet, but I guess he wasn't bad in that movie either -- he should do a good job as a more realistic Bond. I never really liked Pierce Brosnan; he was definitely one of the more 'suave' Bonds, but I didn't find to be him very charismatic.

I liked Pierce as Bond, I never really enjoyed the previous ones, but Pierce did for me.

I'm pretty confident that Craig will do a really charismatic and enjoyable Bond.

It's like you left this in French just to baffle everyone.

Why is this in French and not English?

Eva Green was a very bad choice for the Bond girl. She was alright in Kingdom of Heaven, but that's because she didn't do or say much. She's cute but plain (for a Bond girl, anyway). And Daniel Craig has the wrong looks, very emaciated-looking face.

The best I'm hoping for is that it'll be better than Die Another Day (a horrible, horrible movie).

I'm actually pumped for Daniel Craig to be Bont, unlike alot of people apparently. He's a fantastic actor, and I think he'll perform it very well.

Pierce is probably one of the better Bonds out there, totally encapsulating the look of Bond, so he'll be a tough act to follow. But, I think Craig can give us a more serious Bond, something the franchise needs.

I'm not convinced by Daniel Craig. I've only seen him in Tomb Raider. He just seems to be too much of a wimp to play Bond. At least he's English though.
Eva Green looks but again not seen her in any films so i don't what acting skills she has, so she might actually be good at the role.

i don't think that i'll watch this film. The last one put me off for life.

Eva Green looks good nude.

All that matters.

Megalith, you need to get laid more.

1) There are Eva Green nudes? I'll have to find those.

2) If there's one thing I'm looking forward to in this movie, it's the reported absence of the over-the-top Q-type gizmos. I always liked the technology, but Die Another Day's invisible car and DNA therapy was WAY too much. In that context, it was too ironic that Bond and Jinx had to cut up a fence with a pair of ordinary wire cutters to gain access to that base.

It's as if you got that Hitler avatar just to baffle everyone.

Well because, you know, it's from France.

The trailer has sealed it for me. I actually have faith in it. No shots of Bond doing something wacky, making terrible puns, or anything as tongue in cheek as they have been lately. Bond kicking ass and taking names. That's all that matters.

The Texas Hold Em thing still irks me though. Dropping baccarat for that? I have expect Bond to order "Budweiser. Can, not bottle."

It's the beginning, he's just a simple secret agent, he plays by his rules instead of following a code of ethic, if you will.

Wow, thanks for the trailer link, that looks pretty nifty. I'm a bit of a Bond fan and have enjoyed all the previous films, and whilst I did like Pierce as Bond I don't think Daniel Craig is a bad choice at all. I think Bond could be so much more than it has been, but all in all I'm looking forward to this.

Go watch Layer Cake, you will change your mind, he's perfect for Bond.

The trailer looks very promising, I can't wait to watch this.

All that matters is you getting banned from yet another forum.

KEEP UP THE WORK, SOLDIER!

I totally agree. The thing I found worst about Brosnan was that it appeared he was trying too hard to be charming and suave and couldn't quite pull it off without appearing he was trying that hard. If you compare that with someone like Connery the guy didn't even appear to have to try to be charming/suave/cool he had those qualities in ambudance.

I think the best thing about this film as it appears from the trailer is that they are giving Bond more of an Assasin feel that he should of had in some of the previous films, rather than being the charismatic gentlemanly spy, Craig is playing a more raw and cold Bond which I think will work beautifully yet still retaining the traditional Bond conventions. The only gripe is that I'd wish they had gotten rid of Judi Dench as M, she really doesn't fit the part well in my opinion, I think as with Bond it was time for a change.

I quite like Dench as M, but then I've never read the books so I don't know what M is supposed to be like.

Who is Bond in that teaser. Because every dude in that thing is ugly.

Its Daniel Craig

The trailer does make it look very promising. Quite frankly, the past few Bond movies have caused me to lose faith in the whole franchise as of late. Hopefully the trailer is a good sign that this movie plans to bring something new to the table - a breath of fresh air.

I used to be really skeptical about having Craig as Bond, but the promo pics, set pics and that trailer have made me believe that he could be the best Bond yet (yes, even better than Connery).

I don't think he will be better but he will come close, alot will depend on the film of course.

I think he will silence alot of the critics and the haters and hopefully those morons who plan to boycott the film because he has blonde hair when in the book its supposed to be black (oh noes!!).

And btw yami I'm seeing Muse headlining at Reading this year should be awesome, never seen them live.

Brosnan was the people's choice for Bond in the early 80s, but because of his commitment to Remington Steele, they had to bring in Timothy Dalton, who, although brought out what people say to be the 'real Bond - hard edge, cold as ice, but still with a bit of humour here and there - was TOO serious, especially after the camp and over the top humour that Roger Moore brought in.

Brosnan's Bond was serious, but there was a more relaxed feel to it. He looked a lot more suave, more cool, more gentlemanly than Dalton's revenge-exacting, Miami Vice-inspired bastard.
There was only one moment of that for Brosnan, and that was in The World Is Not Enough when he kills Elektra King.

If you notice, Connery also has moments of that too. One example I remember off the top of my head is in Dr No, when he tells Quarrel to get that photographer chick. He was very much the bastard.

I think Craig IS going to be rather serious in the movie, maybe a little more than we're used to from Brosnan's movies.
I reckon it'll turn out great though.

I think Craig may have the acting credentials to pull off Bond, I have no doubt about it. But the man looks like a weasel: ugly ugly ugly. And it's not the blond hair. He looks like he's spent way too much time out in the sun, like he's aging prematurely or something. He doesn't carry the patient but cunning, suave, self-confidence that his predecessors had.

Tama, I didn't know Brosnan was originally tapped so early... interesting.

Dalton was asked to play Bond when he was in his twentys but he refused the role saying he was too young, of course he later agreed and did 2 films.

Just saw the teaser.

I like how he's even uglier on film.

The new score sounds good though.

I have to agree with Megalith. The guy simply isn't attractive. Or maybe I should say he's not "pretty". He looks like he could be in an action movie, just not a Bond movie. That's why when I saw the trailer I was like, "is this even real?" because he's a pretty average looking guy. Sean Connery was hotness, though.

Bats are to bugs as avatars are to important.

Daniel Craig should have been the villian, but I've never heard of this Mads Mikkelsen guy. I wonder who the second Bond girl will be. They better have one because Eva Green is not hot enough to balance out Daniel Craig's ugliness.

What the hell?
 

lol you guys are so superficial...

I understand that you want the character of Bond to be perfect, IE played by a very attractive actor. But c'mon! You guys are being silly.

Edit: I was confused why they picked Craig in the first place since he's not really well known. I just watched Layer Cake however, and I can't wait to see what he does in the role. Hopefully this movie will bring back some self-respect to the series. Die Another Day was just so remarkably horrible. (I hope others agree with me)

It's a Bond film. I expect hot men, hot ladies, fiendish villains, effortless bullet dodging, and assorted silliness.

Just saw the trailer, I must admit that I also had doubts about Daniel Craig but he seems alright so far. Should be a decent movie. I didn't like Layer Cake very much, but this movie looks like it has some potential.

I agree that Die Another Day was absolutely atrocious. But I am enjoying this discussion of Daniel Craig's ugliness, because he IS ugly. Maybe I've been spoiled by the handsome, sophisticated looks of Brosnan and Moore (although Moore started looking kinda bad by the end of his run); but Eleo is right, this is Bond, not some ordinary spy. We expect over-the-top glamour.

Btw, I know there is no Q or R in this film, but is Judi Dench confirmed as reprising M?

She's in the trailer.

Anybody have an English trailer yet? And in quicktime, Windows Media is not the bees knees.

Sony said that that teaser was not the real teaser trailer.
Thats most likely why we havent seen an English trailer.

The real one will be released in the next week or so, apparently.

One of the things about James Bond is EVERY action has emulated Bond so much, that even though he has his own style, he has become indistinguishable from recent action heroes and movies.
Die Another Day, while it had the campiness, was just too much.
And while it did well at the box office, was just not what Bond was all about. All you needed to do was to take away 'Bond, James Bond', and 'Shaken, Not Stirred', and he would have become like every other mindless action hero.

With the way they're doing with this movie so far is that, yes, while it does have some mindless action, it's more because Bond is not yet a full 00-agent. It's when he becomes one, and is sent on the actual Casino Royale mission that he becomes the person we know from the older movies.

Thats what i HOPE will happen.

Craig MAY NOT have the chops to be Bond.
But judging by that awesome teaser poster, it seems he's doing well.
We'll all just have to see the movie in November to find out for real.
Or, at least, when the theatrical trailer is released.

Well, it appears it IS the official teaser.

Couple links there. Straight from Sony's site, a mirror (that doesn't require you to download some gay plugin), and a link to the French one again.


Sweet.

It looks good... it just doesn't seem, or feel, like a Bond film to me beyond the classic music that plays in the trailer. Just, hopefully, it's better than Die Another Day, which shouldn't be hard.

I really want this to be more like the Bourne movies. Now those were some damn good films!

I'm sorry what? In my opinion he looks like a short hairy Irishman, no wait...he is.

I think the problem is that Connery set the bar too high for all the others, he is the benchmark and none of the others have topped him yet.

Admittedly, Casino Royale will be my first James Bond movie, so I can't join into all this discussion about who's the best Bond and such.

Anyways, despite my not being a Bond fan, I've always associated Pierce Brosnan with the image of James Bond because he was Bond as I was growing up. The first promo photo of Daniel Craig as Bond surprised me, as I was used to Brosnan.

I find that Craig fluctuates between looking very Bond-ly and looking like he needs some plastic surgery. It's a little distracting; he looks dreadful in the teaser poster and downright creepy in the casino shot at the end of the teaser trailer whereas a couple of the production stills make him look much, much better.

No one's talking about the Danish guy. I think he's Danish anyway. He's been in the Pusher movies, and he looks pretty damn sinister. I guess eye scars are the latest Hollywood trend (see A History of Violence, movie with guy missing an eye, etc.).

Whoa!

Thanks Acid!
Vesper Lynd's fiiiine thighs in super high res....fuckin awesome XD

Have they even announced who is doing the theme tune? If not who would be a suitable candidate?

I think it should be somebody of the more older genertion, as it is going back to the beginning of Bond (Well sort of).

Well, the new Casino Royale Trailer is out!!

Check it out here!

Looks like a classier, more dangerous Bond more than ever now.

For an indication, check out the trailers for the previous Bond movies here:

Miss Moneypenny's Rolodex
Click on the relevant movie title, and scroll down to the bottom to see the trailers.

You notice that there's a HUGE difference....

Very much looking forward to it!

Just watched the new trailer and fuck yes this looks cool. I'm so going to see this without question.

Holy shit. Gonna have to see this on opening day, it looks amazing.

Maaaan, the music to that trailer is awesome as well.....

Can't wait for the score to be released.

And since this hasn't been posted yet: Chris Cornell, of Soundgarden/Audioslave/Temple of the Dog fame wrote and performed the song, which is titled 'You Know My Name'.

Don't be fooled by the trailer. It's highly unlikely Arnold's score will sound anything like that (apart from the use fo the theme, obviously).

Sounded very generic to me and the choral version of the Bond theme at the end was truly over-the-top and unnecessary.

Still, that's not to say we can't look forward to the score. But I'm a bit tired of Arnold's Bond efforts. He was fresh and great in TND, and also for a lot of TWINE, but Die Another Day left much to be desired.

I was really disappointed with the Goldeneye score by Eric Serra (which was an attempt at modernising Bond, but just didn't work), and the score for Die Another Day, which was all over the place.

Arnold's score for TND was definitely his best.

Company Car from the TND soundtrack is the best take on the Bond theme ever.
Kudos to Arnold for that.

I also like how he used the tune for KD Lang's 'Surrender' in many of the tracks in TND, which he also did in TWINE (which was also a good score) where many of the tracks reflected the tune for 'Only Myself to Blame' by Scott Walker.
He may definitely do that with Casino Royale, considering he's said that the James Bond theme won't be present in the score at all until near the end or AT the end of the movie.

There were rumours that he was going to take cues from the On Her Majesty's Secret Service theme song, but that was denied.

I'm still looking forward to the score though, considering there's not many of the 'standard' action scenes in this movie that he can use his techno remix stuff on, and that it's not as camp or light-hearted as Brosnan's outings.

I'm guessing a lot of people will probably be aware of this, but if not: there's a Dave Arnold project called "Shaken and Stirred" where he re-worked a number of the old theme songs in collaboration with the likes of Pulp, Aimee Mann and Chrissie Hynde. It's a really good album, or so I think, and worth checking out if you like your Bond music.

Whoa!

Must find this album!!!

If you have a huge amount of trouble tracking it down, let me know as I do have it.

The bourne movies sucked hardcore. If ever a James Bond movie ended up like bourne, I'd drop my fanship of the series right there.


On topic, I think Craig will be pretty damn good as bond.

Bumping this thread because it becomes more relevant in the coming weeks.

I'm very interested to see where this movie goes - as it's both the 21st Bond movie but also a prequel (as it involves Commander Bond's assignment to earn a 00 agent status)

From what I've seen Craig looks great in the part - very much like the Timothy Dalton type Bond (though his 007 movies were fairly subpar), where he's angrier and more aggressive. Much more like the agent Ian Flemming wrote about instead of the stupid pun-driven Bonds in View To A Kill or Die Another Day.

The Movie Bond has evolved into something diffrent the Flemming Bond was, that's true, but it's not something I'd dislike...
Though a "True Bond (c)" Movie would be a cool thing...
Maybe even set in the 70s or rather 80s to minimize hilarity...

Man, the trailer looks awesome, and I think it will really shine. It seems like the series has been refreshed for the movie coming out at the end of the year. You know, its hard to believe after all these years they still make Bond movies.

Isn't this the 21st James Bond Movie?

Now, as much as I hear people saying that there hasn't been a true Bond film since Connery was around, one can't deny that every Bond film made has always been quite a spectacle to behold and this is no different. I'm actually looking forward to this film myself.

Daniel Craig as the new James Bond raised a few eyebrows at first, but at the time I'd only seen him in Tomb Raider (which sucked donkey ass like the cure for cancer lied within.) but after seeing him in Layer Cake and Munich I can totally see him in the role of bond. (Although, he WAS pretty good in Road to Perdition) Eva Green as the new Bond girl is... making me melt... I LOVED her in Kingdom of Heaven (Her character was my favorite in the film) and even though she'll be in more of a materialistic role in this film, I have no doubts about her performance being jawdropping.

Chalk this one up as a must-see for me. :D

well this bond movie sounds like it's an interesting spy thing, and it sounds good and all, but i think the only bad thing about this is the actor. he does not have the bond look or style AT ALL. it sort of destroys the whole outlook on bond. so i'm still debating whether to see it or not when it comes out. hmph.

As opposed to the heavy comedic efforts of View To A Kill or Die Another Day? If anything, Daniel Craig is *more* like Bond than some of the other actors - certainly Roger Moore.

Really depends on where you're coming from, though. Sean Connery is the quintisential movie Bond but Timothy Dalton is still the most like the character in the novels. Brosnan, while a touch wooden at times, seems to understand that Bond is "bigger than life" and kinda runs with it. George Lazenby isn't bad either - On Her Majesty's Secret Service is probably the best movie in the series - but with only one outing, you don't have much to go on.

Craig is very, very similar to Dalton's acting. I'm very interested to see what he gives - the trailers make Bond look more weary and earthy than previous installments which should give the series a nice level of believability its been lacking.

In other news, I have a copy of David Arnold's score already. He said early on that it was most like On Her Majesty's Secret Service as it lacks use of the Bond theme. He's only half correct - the final track ("The Name's Bond...James Bond") is a suite of the famous theme - and theres a couple hints at it through out the score where Arnold plays the ostinato without the melody (think of John Ottman's Superman Returns, where you usually hear just the "climbing" bars without the theme following).

The score is more introverted and dramatic than any Bond score in years, similar to The Living Daylights but with a better handling of the synth. Yes, the score has synth but used in a way similar to Tomorrow Never Dies (ambiance instead of instrument).

"Miami International" is probably the best cue on the disc - running just short of thirteen straight minutes and culminating in some bitch'n fight music.

Craig cannot drive man tran. Aston Martin had to make up a DBS with an automatic for him. Absolutely disgraceful F-- will not watch again

I jest of course. I'm a fan of the Bond series and am currently rewatching some old ones, Moore/Connery and the like. I'm somewhat skeptical about Craig as he doesn't capture the Bond "look" for me, but I cannot jump to any conclusions.

I have an odd feeling that this movie will either really impress me, or completely suck. I say this because the trailer looks so promising, and if it ends up sucking it'll be to the extreme due to the hype I've given this in my mind.

So, here's hoping for a good movie.

I just heard the new Bond theme and I must say it is somewhat mediocre; I just don't like it that much. Cornell is a solid artist and he can produce something better than that. I can except the departure from a more standardised swarve and mystical Bondesqe theme seeing as this is a new chapter in the franchise but this just doesn't fit in the jigsaw. (Who knows maybe it will grow on me just needs a few more listens).

But in the end its the film and not the opening song that is of the utmost importance and fingers crossed it does look good with proper live action stunts instead of a barrage of CG. Tomorrow is the first time the press will actually get to see the film, but not only that this will be the first time the big wigs at Sony who green lighted the project will get to see it too and I can only hope Mr Craig lives up to their expectations this Friday and ours on the 17th.

EDIT: One thing I must say the music video itself increases my hunger to see this film it looks so intense; seeing Bond covered in his own blood is a first. So far no news on a single release nor has this been slated as of yet to be included in the soundtrack I hear.

Agreed. I like Cornell too and I love Bond music - but the song its pretty bland. It also lacks a more orchestral backing. The lyrics for the song are perfect but what good is that if the music sucks?

WHOA WHOA WHAAAT?!
WHERE?!?!

Here, on my MP3 player. I get stuff in advance, either through album promotions or because I know people on the INTARWEB who are the best at what they do.

If you want, theres a review of the album here - http://www.musiconfilm.net/get_review.php?id=140

For some reason, I think Craig looks like a Russian MMA fighter. He hardly looks suave. I'm afraid that these new Bond flicks take themselves way too seriously. I'm just hoping that the plot is decent and not just a 2 hour showcase of stunt sequences and explosions.

Oh, and here's Eva Green's bush to add to Devo's earlier posts.

Wow, I just noticed how huge of a set she's got. Deng.

Last night was the exclusive first screening for the press and the executives at Sony, and I managed to pick up a selection of newspapers and magazines this morning and the reviews are in.

Basically after reading the reviews/articles the bottom line is that the critics thought Daniel Craig was absolutely 'sensational' as Bond and that the film was 144 minutes of excellence, some critics even touting him as being better than Connery and Moore. It seemed many didn't care that they had departed from the original formula, many loved the fact that they saw a Bond truer to Flemming's original writings, hard, gritty, yet deeply sensitive.

I seriously can't wait to see this film now.

Yes, also here is some more confirmation of what you say:-

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/6116286.stm


I too am getting really hyped about this film, and I have always thought that Daniel Craig will do a good job as bond. One of the critics on the BBC link says that it is the ''best film since Goldeneye'': this is also music to my ears: I absolutely loved Goldeneye - easily pierce brosnans best film.

Trailers look great, story sounds great, and everything seems promising to me. I think I can make time for Casino Royale when it hits theatres as I've seen the last two in theatres as well. I agree that David Arnold's score for Die Another Day was rather disappointing, so I'm hoping he makes a comeback for this film. If the music is good enough, I may buy the score soundtrack (which doesn't include the title song, surprisingly).

Just got back from seeing the film and I must say it was really rather good. Daniel Craig did a top job as Bond and the film worked, it is exactly what the franchise needed in my opinion.

With regards to the music, as it has got some comments here, I thought it was good. I even thought the title theme worked within the context of the film, especially as an instrumental motif.

I saw it today too. Pretty solid film and is certainly a change from having the usual gadgets, one-liners, and one dimensional women.

I'll have to agree with others saying that this is easily the best Bond flick since Goldeneye. Not better though, as the two movies are very different.

I checked it out last night. I'm glad it doesn't disappoint, but paints a much more tougher, darker side of Bond with Daniel Craig having to fill in some big shoes. What I liked the most of Craig's Bond is he's the quick think-on-your-feet type that doesn't rely soley on gadgets to get by, but utilizes various environmental objects to his advantage, such as depicted in the opening chase sequence which was an absolute thrill to watch. Honestly when I first saw Mr. Craig's countenance, I couldn't see Bond at all. He didn't have that handsomeness as Brosnan or even Connery, but as the film progressed, I soon grew to like him, much like Christian Bale is to Batman. I found Brosnan more suave, but a bit too arrogant at times, but I can take Craig just as serious as the better Bonds.

I liked the movie for already mentioned reasons, but I wasn't as impressed with the girl this time round. She was very, for lack of a better coloquialism, "paper bag pretty". During the whole time she was talking to Bond on the that train, all I could think was "Sweet Jesus look at those teeth".

Pretty nice tits though.

I just saw this Friday night, and I'm quite satisfied. The intro was pretty fancy, and I liked the theme for it as well, I think it would have been better if it were sung by a female though.

Quite a few parts during the film made me laugh, I thoroughly enjoyed the little bits of comedy.


haha, I look forward to future bond movies.

Totally agree, non clicé, great character development no car chases, everything very down to earth but serious, action was intense but not over the top. Daniel Craig did an excellent job, and there were someone liners but they were clever! not the corny ones from the prior films. Only thing I didnt like was how they sped up the ending.

Greykin - You and me both, and the finale that was awesome!




Spoiler regarding car chases

I imagine anyone who know's who he is did. It certainly got a chuckle from the whole audience at the showing I saw it at.

I love the new Bond... much more like the books. I think that comparisons between Brosnan and Craig would be a little unfair since they are playing different types of Bonds.
Craig's is definately the unpolished precursor of the suave 007 we are used to.

Gotta say, this movie has put me back onto Bond movies. After the declining quality of the later Brosnan pictures (especially Die Another Day, o god, what were they thinking. Haley Barrey? What the fuck) this one really bolstered my appreciation for them.

I loved all the little jokes they threw in there. I'm liking Craig as the new Bond, and i expect great things from him.

Also, absolutly loved the opening sequence. Can't wait for new ones.

They must work on a new bond asap, I cant wait 2 or 3 years like the Bourne movies :aargh:

Much better than I expected. This is the kind of Bond movies we need for this day and age. Daniel Craig is great as 007, and criticism of him replacing Brosnan I think was way overblown and these people refused to accept change. Too bad, Daniel is the new Bond and I think alot of fans think he was great and already want to see more of him in future Bond films.

Finally we have a Bond film that is really solid, cleverness that felt natural and not forced, and a more down to Earth and darker James Bond. A Bond who feels emotion, not afraid to show off his ego, and makes mistakes. With previous films, you knew James was going to get the bad guy in the end, get the girl, and everything is going to end all happily. That's not entirely the case with this film at all. Casino Royale has depth, and is probably the best Bond film in who knows how many years.

My Casino Royale Review
 

I just wrote my extensive review which you can read HERE. Overall I have to say that this is a sure recommendation for pretty much everyone!

Yeah, here's a link to my blog which has a review as well, so I don't have to contribute anything unique or useful to the thread without linking you elsewhere and getting hits for my damn diary.

The movie fucking rocks. Best Bond since the last good Bond movie. I can't think of a good Bond movie off the top of my head, so let's just leave it at good.

haha nice url, id visit that!

Live and Let Die!

I saw Casino Royale on Friday and it was awesome! Craig's a really good Bond in my opinion, and the movie itself was refreshing, not same old same old.

He was a natural. For this being his 1st Bond movie, he played the part damn well. The movie was well done as well, it had plenty of action, a great story and it was well acted.

It wasn't overdone w/ special effects and that's soemthing that I rather enjoyed.

Yep! GREAT movie. Different, but was still the great James Bond. I find this movie to give a complete overhaul of Bond, which is actually a good thing because after 20 movies, the same formula can get old.

Saw it just a few hours ago. Excellently done. Didn't have to suspend disbelief nearly as much as in previous Bond flicks, yet it was still just as much fun. Craig is lined up perfectly to become the "new favorite Bond."

I was talking w/ my friend about it and I just remembered the funniest part..

Just saw the movie. Craig was a great Bond.... and Casino Royale was a great movie. My only gripe.. is Sony.

http://img63.imageshack.us/img63/399...2383004hy3.png

Little blurry, I know, so here's a shot to compare it to:
http://it.gizmodo.com/Blu-Ray%20TDK.bmp

It was almost as bad as I, Robot. Sony phone, Sony discs, Sony Laptop, Sony, Sony, Sony.

I just learned that Audioslave is on Sony records, too. Given, Chris Cornell's song is pretty nice... Sony can't own the world anymore, can they.

I know how you feel neothe0ne. I love the movie but Sony "whore" it.

From what I've been gathering, Daniel Craig's Bond is kicking all kinds of arse. But with this bond being flawed and more realistic, isn't he in danger of becoming more of a generic common modern day hollywood law-enforcer? Or does Craig manage to separate his Bond from all that?

This 007 is getting rave reviews. My curiousity is making me watch it once it comes out here.

It was a very big surprise for me! excellent movie!

I saw this movie last night and found it absolutely fantastic. THIS IS WHAT BOND IS ABOUT.

Though it does kinda skew the timeline a bit, given that this story was written a long time ago, yet a few things appear in the movie:



And about the poker game:

Weren't they effectively rebooting the series though?

Yes, it is a rebooting of the series.

Yeah. It's close enough to be considered a prequel by most people, but it is effectively a scrapping of all prior continuity so future storylines aren't restricted by them. Which if you think about it, kind of makes sense considering how many decades of time Bond has covered throughout the series.

But yeah, it was an absolutely awesome movie. Hopefully they'll keep this new tone for the future Daniel Craig films (he's contracted for two more — yay!), although I would like to see a little more of the humour/one-liners seen in the previous films. :) :)

Awesome movie. Loved every minute of it.

Thats not as big of a deal as they make it out to be. They've rebooted the series three times prior (On Her Majesty's Secret Service, The Living Daylights and Goldeneye) though you might count a fourth one (Never Say Never Again) that really didn't go anywhere.

They reboot the series and it keeps on falling back on the crappy, pun-heavy Roger Moore approach. We will end up with another TWINE at some point, it's going to happen.

However this movie is pretty goddamned great. It gets a lot of things right (lack of gadgets, beating the crap out of people, pacing) but it's also missing obvious Bond staples, like a megalomaniac. Yes, I realize they were shooting for a more "realistic" Bond, but they've done that before and had larger-than-life villians.

Given the hype, I was rather disappointed by this movie. That's not to say that it's a bad movie. It is, however, flawed. A few of the plot points necessary to make the whole story work are confusing. A few things are unclear. But Craig plays Bond well enough (if he'd keep his shirt on more) and the story is compelling. The poker game is quite well done. The interaction between characters is quite enjoyable. I give 3.5 stars out of 5.

Were any other poker players out there dismayed at the total lack of realism in the poker scenes? It seems as if they wanted to tone down the craziness somewhat and make it more believable but come on....




Overall great movie though, Eva Green might be the hottest Bond Girl since who knows when.

Loved it! Daniel Craig, in particular, is fantastic and really refreshing as Bond. The people threatening to boycott the movie (due to Craig) are idiots. I'm really looking forward to the next one.

I appreciate that fact, and I don't disagree that that's the case, but the fact that this is also a 'reboot' means they don't need to worry about the timeline continuity issue that was raised.

James Bond has only rarely had any sense of continuity. Aside from the awful LETS HAVE OLD GADGETS scene in Die Another Day and George Lazenby breaking the fourth wall in OHMSS, it isn't like theres this constant thread.

(Wait, forgot about Bond's wife dying. They've mentioned that once or twice)

There was an author who attempted to make the name "James Bond" an operative word, which would mean that each actor was in fact playing a different person using the same code name. That was thrown out pretty quickly.

They did that in the original Casino Royal too. Pretty clever, actually...

You currently have pierce brosnan as your avatar, yet he also went for the ''pun-heavy'' approach you appear to dislike.


That is exaclty what I (and others) thought shortly after seeing the film; the villian was a little bit bland and uninspiring. I think they intended this though as we are being introduced to bond at a time when his missions aren't as large scale as they will eventually become.

I expect the next film to have a much larger scale mission/villian, without it being over of course (like Die Another Day).

All Bond movies have puns in them - its a matter of delivery. Though, yes, DAD was intolerable.

I thought the poker-playing villain was superb as far as behaviour and visual presence went, even if he wasn't as elaborate as those we'll surely see in future films. He certainly looked/acted the part though.

Too true. Also, if these people are the world's best poker players, I'd figure that you'd see some cameos by people like Doyle Brunson or Johnny Chan.



I thought the intro credits sequence needed some silhouettes of some hotties, and I thought the Cornell song was a bit bland.

And yeah, Eva Green was the hotness and her character was very likeable.

Overall, it was a very enjoyable movie, and I'm very much looking forward to more Bond flicks now.

It takes time but it grows on you. Sadly, the orchestral heavy version from the movie isn't what the released single is like at all.

Saw the film over the weekend. Generally pretty good, though the last half-hour really dragged; the big action setpieces are very much frontloaded.

But...

That arguement doesn't make any sense. Goldeneye, Living Daylights, OHMSS or Live And Let Die were all reboots that did the exact same thing this one did - but they didn't piss all over the series like you claim. Does Kevin McClory's lawsuit piss all over the Bond franchise in the same way?

Bond movies have never had a discernable continuity. They're not suppose to really, aside from generic things like Q not liking Bond or Diana Rigg's character being dead.

The problem is that it was time to ditch Brosnan - just like they did to Moore and Dalton - and it happend around a time where "Rebooting" has become popular.

They weren't reboots in the way I'm using the term. Yes, they featured new actors with different takes on the character, but they were fully in continuity with the previous films, even ones with different actors, in that they acknowledged that those movies had taken place.

For example, in OHMSS, Lazenby's Bond is shown going over gadgets he collected in previous adventures, even though he was played by Connery in those movies. Moore's Bond is shown putting flowers on his wife's grave in "For Your Eyes Only;" Dalton's Bond "was married once," according to Leiter. And Brosnan's Bond goes through a whole roomful of junk from previous films in "Die Another Day."

There are more examples, of course. "Casino Royale," like the other Bond transitions, features a new take on the character. I'm fine with that and I like Craig's Bond. I just wish it didn't start the series' continuity over from scratch.

There is no real discernable continuity. You're talking about one character who obviously spans several decades in time, from the height and then past the Cold War.

That alone speaks volumes of the lack or simply flexible continuity.

He also says "This didn't happen to the other bloke" in the very beginning of the movie. Breaking the imaginary fourth wall alone should destroy whatever credibility continuity should have by acknowledging Connery.

You made some good points with "For Your Eyes Only" and "Living Daylights" - but one could argue that the stupid gadget scene in DAD is only there for fan reference and not as to say HEY THIS JETPACK WAS FROM THIS MOVIE AND THIS BOOTKNIFE WAS FROM THAT MOVIE. It's not specific - it's what you call a "homage".

In the end, theres no evidence that they started any type of continuity in the first place, let alone over again. Why is M still played by Judi Dench? Why is Felix Lieter in here - let alone played by a black man?

Bond does have a certain number of things that make up a Bond movie - Q, nice cars, women with their tits hanging out - but because some of those things are missing doesn't mean anything. Q was in 16 out of 17 Bond movies - because he wasn't seen in that one movie, does that mean it's not a Bond movie?

It was more that it was time they got around to making Casino Royale into an official movie.
As far as I'm concerned, they haven't made a movie based on a book since Moonraker, and even that was very LOOSELY based on the book.

From that point onward, they were all original stories. The books For Your Eyes Only and Octopussy and The Living Daylights was just a collection of short story, and the movies featured their own original stories - albeit VERY LOOSELY based on those books.

Every Bond actor, as far as I'm concerned, has his OWN continuity.
Each period of their tenure as Bond follows the actor more than the story in terms of continuity, especially with the introduction of supporting characters:

Sheriff JW Pepper is in Live and Let Die, and then The Man With the Golden Gun - in which he remembers Bond from the previous time they met. That's a continuity within the Moore period.

Another example is CIA Agent Jack Wade in Brosnan's movies, first appearing in Goldeneye, and then Tomorrow Never Dies.

The execption to the first 20 Bond movies is Q, Moneypenny, M and Felix Leiter.

In Casino Royale, they really are restarting EVERYTHING. the 'original' M is now a woman, Felix is now African-American, etc, and there are introductions to every character as Bond meets them.
So Daniel Craig will have his own continuity that won't even be part of the 'overall rough continuity' of the other movies.

Reports have also surfaced from Eva Green herself that the baddie in the next Bond movie is actually going to be Vesper Lynd's lover, so that's a direct continuity with Casino Royale right there.

Has anybody read the Casino Royale book? I'm wondering how closely it follows the story, and if somebody could give a comparison. I really need to read the Bond books myself at some point. fucking school...

Casino Royale Sountrack-Review
 

I wrote a review about the Casino Royale Soundtrack which you can read HERE and also stated why the theme-song didn't make it on the CD.

Never mind. Ill keep my comments to myself.

Elrasiel, advertise your blog in this manner again and you're banned for a week. This is an official warning.